Concept of “end of history” and its rethinking: F. Fukuyama’s views evolution
https://doi.org/10.20310/1810-0201-2019-24-180-186-195
Abstract
We analyze the evolution of the Fukuyama’s views on the development of modern globalized world. The relevance of the topic is due to the fact that this issue is not fully covered in the Russian scientific literature. In particular, little attention is paid to the Western critics of F. Fukuyama, who from the very beginning put forward serious remarks against his concept. We rely on a chronological method, in which the ideological evolution of F. Fukuyama correlates with key events in the history of international relations, for example, September 11, 2001. It is proved, that as a result the American thinker seriously revised his famous concept of “end of history”. Although F. Fukuyama still does not see any serious competition between liberal democracy and rival ideologies, he admits that there are fundamental problems in the system he proposed earlier. F. Fukuyama notes that the main peril for liberal democracy comes from its internal weaknesses, which are related to the biosocial nature of human and the structure of his inner personality. At the same time, F. Fukuyama acknowledges, it is impossible to suspend the development of technologies, specifically biotechnologies, and to predict the results that it can bring to the whole mankind. Because of that, we conclude that the “end of history” is postponed, and liberal democracy is only a short step in the endless spiral of the existence of human society.
About the Author
D. N. KhristenkoRussian Federation
Dmitrii N. Khristenko, Candidate of History, Senior Lecture History and Philosophy Department
6 Chkalov St., Yaroslavl 150054
References
1. Friedman T.L. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century Hardcover. New York, Farrar, Straus and Giroux Publ., 2005.
2. Fukuyama F. Konets istorii [The end of history]. Voprosy filosofii – Russian Studies in Philosophy, 1990, no. 3, pp. 134-148. (In Russian).
3. Zamoshkin Y.A. «Konets istorii»: ideologizm i realism [“End of history”: ideologism and realism]. Voprosy filosofii – Russian Studies in Philosophy, 1990, no. 3, рp. 148-156. (In Russian).
4. Skinner B.F. The Behavior of Organisms. New York, 1938, 486 p.
5. Hegel G.W. Filosofiya istorii [Philoshophy of history]. In: Hegel G.W. Sochineniya [Essays]. Moscow, 1935, vol. 8, p. 19. (In Russian).
6. Fuller T., Satter D., Stove D., Will F. More Responses to Fukuyama. The National Interest, 1989, no. 17, pp. 93-100.
7. Bloom A., Hassner P., Himmelfarb G., Kristol I., Moynihan D.P., Sestanovich S. Responses to Fukuyama. The National Interest, 1989, no. 16, pp. 19-35.
8. Walter B.M. Posthistoricism. Transition, 1996, no. 70, pp. 4-19.
9. Huntington S. Stolknovenie tsivilizatsiy [Clash of Civilizations]. Moscow, AST Publ., 2003, 603 р. (In Russian).
10. Zakaria F. The End of the End of History. Newsweek, 2001, 24 September.
11. Fukuyama F. The West has won: Radical Islam can't beat democracy and capitalism. We’re still at the end of history. The Guardian, 2001, 11 October.
12. Leonard M. What does China think? New York, 2008, 176 p.
13. Fukuyama F. Konets istorii i posledniy chelovek [The End of History and the Last Man]. Moscow, AST Publ., 2005, 588 p. (In Russian).
14. Nietzsche F. Tak govoril Zaratustra [Thus Spoke Zarathustra]. Minsk, 1997, 632 p. (In Russian).
15. Houellebecq M. Pokornost [Submission]. Moscow, AST Publ., 2016, 352 p. (In Russian).
16. Palahniuk C. Fight Club: A Novel. New York, 2005, 224 p.
17. Hegel G.W. Filosofiya prava [Philosophy of Right]. Moscow, Mysl Publ., 1990, 524 p. (In Russian).
18. Hahlweg К. The Future of History. Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, 1996, no. 88, pp. 128-143.
19. May R.J. Revisiting Fukuyama: On the Struggle for Recognition, Aggression, and Territorial Imperatives from the Beginning of History to the End of Time. World Affairs, 1996, vol. 158, no. 4, pp. 193-197.
20. Steger B.M. (ed.). Rethinking Globalism. New York, 2004, 288 p.
21. Fukuyama F. Nashe postchelovecheskoye budushcheye: Posledstviya biotekhnologicheskoy revolyutsii [Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of Biotechnology Revolution]. Moscow, 2004, 349 p. (In Russian).
22. Kazennov D.K. Bioeticheskiye suzhdeniya o gennoy inzhenerii [Bioethical judgments about genetic engineering]. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika – Izvestiya of Saratov University. Series: Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 2011, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 32-35. (In Russian).
23. Akulova I.S. «Konets istorii» kak znachimyy element filosofskogo mirovozzreniya [“End of history” as a significant element of philosophical world outlook]. Vestnik Chitinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Transbaikal State University Journal, 2008, no. 2 (47), pp. 65-69. (In Russian).
24. Chernikova I.V., Sherenkova V.V. Problema sokhraneniya prirody cheloveka kak novyy aspekt krizisa identichnosti [The problem of preserving human nature as a new aspect of the identity crisys]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science, 2015, no. 4 (32), pp. 222-229. (In Russian).
25. Hawking S. Brief Answers to the Big Questions. New York, Bantam Books, 2018.
Review
For citations:
Khristenko D.N. Concept of “end of history” and its rethinking: F. Fukuyama’s views evolution. Tambov University Review. Series: Humanities. 2019;24(180):186-195. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20310/1810-0201-2019-24-180-186-195